aclayman wrote:Attendance rankings in football come down to the size of your stadium. Most teams (save for the Bengals and Jags) sell out their games. It's the NFL. This has nothing to do with whether the Browns or Indians are more beloved by Clevelanders (yes, it's the Browns). The point-- again-- is that pointing to football attendance numbers, as Perez does, as some argument of "blind loyalty" is stupid. If you're an NFL team, you are probably selling out your games. It's not really a statement on anything, let alone the quality of your city's baseball fans. If he wants to rip on us for being #30, s'all good. Just don't drag the Browns into this.

So you think the love for the Browns is only because it is an NFL team. Even though they also ld the All Amereican Football Conference in attendance.

Explain the popularity of high school football in Ohio and Western PA. Other than a handful of other hotbeds (Texas, Florida) high school football just doesn't have this popularity.

Then there's college, where else do you have such a rabid following of a school 150 miles away? And so much hatred for a school geographically closer? I'd wager to say there is more hatred for the University of Michigan than there is give-a-shit for the non-contending Cavaliers.

Even look at bastardized football, setting the Arena Football League record and being the only profitable franchise before the reorganization. We probably had more fans watch the team forfeit than the Oakland A's had at some of their games.

Being part of rhe NFL has some to do with the Browns popularity, you haven't convinced me this is not a football hotspot.

THE OWNERS OF THE BROWNS HAVE NEVER ALIANTED A MAJORITY OF ITS PAYING CUSTOMERS BY INSINUATING IT IS OUR RESPOSIBILITY TO PAY THEM MONEY BEFORE THEY PUT A PRODUCT ON THE FIELD.

THE OWNERS OF THE CLEVELAND BROWNS HAVE NEVER TOLD THE FAN BASE WE CAN ONLY COMPETE 2X PER DECADE.

THE OWNERS OF THE CLEVELAND BROWNS HAVE NEVER HAD A PUBLICATION, MULTIPLE TIMES, LIST IT AS THE MOST PROFITABLE ORGANIZATION IN THE SPORT...ALL WHILE PINCHING EVERY PENNY.

THE CLEVELAND BROWNS HAVE NEVER TRADED THE BEST PLAYERS AT THEIR POSITION, BACK TO BACK YEARS, FOR A BAG OF BALLS AND SOME JOCKS.

The Browns may blow (though the Indians only have 1 more playoff appearance and as many winning seasons in the last 10 years). But at least they have not previously pissed on their fanbase and told them it was raining.

Spin wrote:Being part of rhe NFL has some to do with the Browns popularity, you haven't convinced me this is not a football hotspot.

I am not even making that argument. Of course NE Ohio is a football hotbed. This is ONLY about people comparing NFL and MLB attendance numbers head-to-head with the Perez logic that, "if A, then why not B?" The answer is, cuz A and B are totally freaking different things. I am very open to the idea that Cleveland sports fans are too distracted by Trent Richardson cone drills to notice their (sort of) competitive baseball team. Just don't say the Browns' attendance figures are the stand alone evidence for that. Preferable evidence: a Case Western research study in which 100 Indians fans acknowledged skipping a game at Progressive Field to stay home and watch Phil Dawson youtube clips.

Hell, the Aeros are having a great season at the moment (7.5 games ahead in the Eastern League west), and the folks down here never show up to any fucking games.

It's not the stadium, or promotions, or customer service. All are excellent. Just people are weird here about baseball.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

jb wrote:The Browns start off drawing until they suck. Then the exodus happens, but every year there is a ground swell of support until lost.

The Indians don't get that credit and extension of faith, and now they don't even get attendance when they win.

While reading all the posts in this thread this point struck me in a different way. The Browns start play in the middle summer, first game that counts is around Labor Day, and the weather is prime for grilling and tail-gating and basking in the sun. By the time the Browns are done for the season, the weather is changing and all that's left is the tail-gating. You actually can do that without a ticket, but if the team sucks totally by then you can let your seat stay empty and just keep on partying in the lot. Tribe starts when the weather sucks (I've been to a number of home openers where the hot chocolate isn't anything but chocolate by the time you get it to your seat) and the kids are still in school, and no opportunity to tailgate. By the time the kids are sprung and the weather is nice the Tribe has started into the June Swoon. Like most everything else, timing is everything.

I've tried 'em all, I really have, and the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball.~~~Annie Savoy-"Bull Durham"

pup wrote:Difference is, one does everything he can to both suck and alienate his base.

Jammies Lerner.

Now sit down and shut up before we kick you out of the stadium.

Right.

Alert me when the Browns make the playoffs, have a 4th quarter lead in the AFC Championship, Brandon Weeden and Trent Richardson are back to back league MVP...and we trade them both for a punter, long snapper and 3rd down back.

If anything has been learned about Cleveland Fan, we are obviously a very spiteful group. And they hate Dolan because of the trades. Sell or spend. When you do spend, make sure boy wonder and puppet don't fuck it up. If they do, fire them.

And for the 500th time, this isn't about the NFL being more popular, it is about every other gawd damn NFL market that has a baseball team actually supporting both. Only in Cleveland (also the worst NFL team in the league) do you have this support one sport while shitting on the other stupidity.

Cleveland Fan has been kicked in the junk so many times over the past 48 years, I think they're just at the point of saying 'screw it.' They only show up at Browns games for the tailgating and the faint hope that this is the year the NFL parity fairy will get around to us.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

Whoever said football and baseball were too apples and oranges to even try a comparison is absolutely right, and that's before you get into our region's sports DNA. However, I think the Cavs would be a fair comparison with 41 home games. The team stinks, they're not going to be relevant for another several years, any decent ticket carries an exorbitant price, they play indoors, you often have to fight terrible weather to drive to the game, and the Q is nice but just another generic NBA arena. Yet, they averaged 15,926 fans a game for about 77% of capacity. The Tribe are nowhere close to that.

I get as angry as any of you with how the Indians are run sometimes, but there really is no excuse for the discrepancy. The games are outside and usually in great weather, even good tickets are very reasonably priced (and you can buy cheapies and sneak down anyway), and they've played relevant baseball for most of the last two seasons. Dolan's cheapness has been debated ad nauseum on here but it's hard to argue with "perception is reality" at this point.

Last edited by Kingpin74 on Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

e0y2e3 wrote:The Cavs ranked 27th in the league in capacity, .01% ahead of the record setting Bobcats

WOOHOO

Still though, if the Tribe could draw 77% that would be in the neighborhood of 31K and we wouldn't be having this conversation. And the difference in ticket prices should more than cover the additional games and stadium capacity.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

If you are going to make comments about the NFL not being apples to apples (even though FANS CHOOSING IT AND SHITTING ON THE INDIANS MAKES IT AN APT COMPARISON) you have to also accept that the # of people attending the Cavs games (for the vastly more popular sports league) is pretty damn close to the # of people attending Indians games.

If the team isn't going to draw because fans are spiteful cunts they don't deserve a team, especially when those trades had to happen.

I guess if you believe they HAD to happen, it explains your position. It is just an asinine position, but defend til the cows come home brother.

They didn't have to decide to sign a one dimensional DH to a long term contract instead of CC Sabathia. They decided to do that. They didn't have to give a 4th starter an extension, at the cost of keeping Cliff Lee. They decided to do that.

All the while, they tell us it is not about the $...it is about the years. Which builds in an excuse, because free agents want years and $. They try to bullshit an entire fan base because they are smarter than we are.

Quit with the move the team bullshit. We have a team and will support the team. When they stop treating us like a bunch of sheep.

e0y2e3 wrote:If you are going to make comments about the NFL not being apples to apples (even though FANS CHOOSING IT AND SHITTING ON THE INDIANS MAKES IT AN APT COMPARISON) you have to also accept that the # of people attending the Cavs games (for the vastly more popular sports league) is pretty damn close to the # of people attending Indians games.

Both fan bases are shit.

Maybe both are but there's still a difference. The Cavs are drawing functional crowds with triple the ticket prices (at least) while the Indians are dead last with a better team. The NBA's popularity compared to baseball can't make that big of a difference, at least in this market.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

If the team isn't going to draw because fans are spiteful cunts they don't deserve a team, especially when those trades had to happen.

I guess if you believe they HAD to happen, it explains your position. It is just an asinine position, but defend til the cows come home brother.

They didn't have to decide to sign a one dimensional DH to a long term contract instead of CC Sabathia. They decided to do that. They didn't have to give a 4th starter an extension, at the cost of keeping Cliff Lee. They decided to do that.

All the while, they tell us it is not about the $...it is about the years. Which builds in an excuse, because free agents want years and $. They try to bullshit an entire fan base because they are smarter than we are.

Quit with the move the team bullshit. We have a team and will support the team. When they stop treating us like a bunch of sheep.

I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I also fail to see the connection between Fausberto's 4 year, $15 million extension and Cliff Lee's 5 year, $120 million deal.

You really think those were each either/or scenarios? You are honestly going to sit there and tell us that it was either Sabathia or Hafner, and the Indians chose Hafner? That it was Lee or Carmona, and the front office thought Carmona was a better option?

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars

If the team isn't going to draw because fans are spiteful cunts they don't deserve a team, especially when those trades had to happen.

I guess if you believe they HAD to happen, it explains your position. It is just an asinine position, but defend til the cows come home brother.

They didn't have to decide to sign a one dimensional DH to a long term contract instead of CC Sabathia. They decided to do that. They didn't have to give a 4th starter an extension, at the cost of keeping Cliff Lee. They decided to do that.

All the while, they tell us it is not about the $...it is about the years. Which builds in an excuse, because free agents want years and $. They try to bullshit an entire fan base because they are smarter than we are.

Quit with the move the team bullshit. We have a team and will support the team. When they stop treating us like a bunch of sheep.

I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I also fail to see the connection between Fausberto's 4 year, $15 million extension and Cliff Lee's 5 year, $120 million deal.

You really think those were each either/or scenarios? You are honestly going to sit there and tell us that it was either Sabathia or Hafner, and the Indians chose Hafner? That it was Lee or Carmona, and the front office thought Carmona was a better option?

I think he meant Westbrook. And it's tough to guess but CC was 1.5 years from free agency when Hafner signed that deal. 4 years, $57M wouldn't have done the trick but 5 years, $80M might have. They just didn't want to get aggressive and it cost them. Lee I give them a pass on because he went from getting sent to the minors to becoming a Cy Young candidate in less than a year. They never had time to make a reasonable deal for an extension. Their return obtained in his trade is a different story.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

If the team isn't going to draw because fans are spiteful cunts they don't deserve a team, especially when those trades had to happen.

I guess if you believe they HAD to happen, it explains your position. It is just an asinine position, but defend til the cows come home brother.

They didn't have to decide to sign a one dimensional DH to a long term contract instead of CC Sabathia. They decided to do that. They didn't have to give a 4th starter an extension, at the cost of keeping Cliff Lee. They decided to do that.

All the while, they tell us it is not about the $...it is about the years. Which builds in an excuse, because free agents want years and $. They try to bullshit an entire fan base because they are smarter than we are.

Quit with the move the team bullshit. We have a team and will support the team. When they stop treating us like a bunch of sheep.

I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I also fail to see the connection between Fausberto's 4 year, $15 million extension and Cliff Lee's 5 year, $120 million deal.

You really think those were each either/or scenarios? You are honestly going to sit there and tell us that it was either Sabathia or Hafner, and the Indians chose Hafner? That it was Lee or Carmona, and the front office thought Carmona was a better option?

I think he meant Westbrook. And it's tough to guess but CC was 1.5 years from free agency when Hafner signed that deal. 4 years, $57M wouldn't have done the trick but 5 years, $80M might have. Lee I give them a pass on because he went from getting sent to the minors to becoming a Cy Young candidate in less than a year. They never had time to make a reasonable deal for an extension. Their return obtained in his trade is a different story.

Yup, Westy, my bad.

It wouldn't have done it. 80<160. The Yankees were always going to come way over the top for Sabathia, no matter what the Indians offered. MAYBE he would have given a "hometown discout" to $150 million. But the Yanks were never going to be in the same ballpark as the Indians offer.

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars

If the team isn't going to draw because fans are spiteful cunts they don't deserve a team, especially when those trades had to happen.

I guess if you believe they HAD to happen, it explains your position. It is just an asinine position, but defend til the cows come home brother.

They didn't have to decide to sign a one dimensional DH to a long term contract instead of CC Sabathia. They decided to do that. They didn't have to give a 4th starter an extension, at the cost of keeping Cliff Lee. They decided to do that.

All the while, they tell us it is not about the $...it is about the years. Which builds in an excuse, because free agents want years and $. They try to bullshit an entire fan base because they are smarter than we are.

Quit with the move the team bullshit. We have a team and will support the team. When they stop treating us like a bunch of sheep.

I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I also fail to see the connection between Fausberto's 4 year, $15 million extension and Cliff Lee's 5 year, $120 million deal.

You really think those were each either/or scenarios? You are honestly going to sit there and tell us that it was either Sabathia or Hafner, and the Indians chose Hafner? That it was Lee or Carmona, and the front office thought Carmona was a better option?

I think he meant Westbrook. And it's tough to guess but CC was 1.5 years from free agency when Hafner signed that deal. 4 years, $57M wouldn't have done the trick but 5 years, $80M might have. Lee I give them a pass on because he went from getting sent to the minors to becoming a Cy Young candidate in less than a year. They never had time to make a reasonable deal for an extension. Their return obtained in his trade is a different story.

Yup, Westy, my bad.

It wouldn't have done it. 80<160. The Yankees were always going to come way over the top for Sabathia, no matter what the Indians offered. MAYBE he would have given a "hometown discout" to $150 million. But the Yanks were never going to be in the same ballpark as the Indians offer.

Of course we could never bid with the Yankees, but that 1.5 years of service time left was a big bargaining chip. A guy with CC's health/weight issues might have wanted security early.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

gotribe31 wrote:I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I?

I think what he is saying is that he wanted them( and I agree) to take the 57 million they gave to Hafner and the 33 million they gave to Westbrook and taken that money (added a little extra) to pay Sabathia.

There are other variables involved but I really do think that they could have gotten him signed for around 90 -110 million if they would have made a pre-empetive strike Either before he signed the 2 yr 17 million extension ala the Dan Haren extension that was signed around that time or if they would have come at CC in his walk year with a legit offer using that pool of money with some extra added on.

But they chose to sign 2 instead of 1 which you cant really fault them for because Hafner at the time developed into arguably one of the best hitters in the game and westbrook was quality.

gotribe31 wrote:I don't see what Hafner's 4 year, $57 million deal has to do with CC's 7 year, $161 million deal.

I?

I think what he is saying is that he wanted them( and I agree) to take the 57 million they gave to Hafner and the 33 million they gave to Westbrook and taken that money (added a little extra) to pay Sabathia.

There are other variables involved but I really do think that they could have gotten him signed for around 90 -110 million if they would have made a pre-empetive strike Either before he signed the 2 yr 17 million extension ala the Dan Haren extension that was signed around that time or if they would have come at CC in his walk year with a legit offer using that pool of money with some extra added on.

But they chose to sign 2 instead of 1 which you cant really fault them for because Hafner at the time developed into arguably one of the best hitters in the game and westbrook was quality.

1) The money still doesn't add up to one CC

2) Pup is saying they chose two instead of two, not two instead of one

e0y2e3 wrote:Security when he know the Yankees were foaming at the mouth for a chance to bid on him.

LULZ

Haha, Lee he was getting "I'm fat" abdominal/oblique injuries for a few weeks every year at that time. 1.5 years is a long time for a power pitcher, you never know if they'd actually been aggressive negotiators. And the choosing two over CC argument is exactly right. They half assed it with more "signable" players and you see the results. I'd much rather the team was run like the Rays and that money was redirected to early offers to star younger players. Then you just deal with the attrition when it happens because you draft well and your system is loaded with good replacements (imagine that). If you're cash strapped, fine. But you shouldn't be dabbling in long term free agency with players who aren't superstars (and Hafner was already regressing when he signed his deal).

Last edited by Kingpin74 on Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:54 am, edited 2 times in total.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

Nobody was frothing at the mouth for him after his consecutive 4+ ERA seasons 3 years prior to his free agency. We bought out some arby years, but multiple accounts had them refusing to talk long term, because they don't do 7 year deals. Too risky.

e0y2e3 wrote:There is no point in discussing anything with people that believe Hafner and Westbrook were chosen over CC and Lee.

Really, no point at all.

And it explains everything Pup is saying about this delusional and not worthy of having a team fanbase.

"Choose" is the wrong word. But "settle for these guys instead of getting serious and going after the real star 1.5 years from his free agency"? I think so. And again, I give them a pass on Lee. There was never really a window after his '08 resurgence when he was signable (always seemed to have one foot out the door) and the team stunk by then.

Last edited by Kingpin74 on Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:55 am, edited 2 times in total.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

e0y2e3 wrote:There is no point in discussing anything with people that believe Hafner and Westbrook were chosen over CC and Lee.

Really, no point at all.

.

I dont believe that they were chosen over CC and Lee but I do believe they chose Westbrook and Hafner over CC. They took easier signs and quantity over allocating all of that resource money to 1 player and taking a risk.

Again they could have signed him for longer than the original 2 yr extension. They didnt.

e0y2e3 wrote:And for the 500th time, this isn't about the NFL being more popular, it is about every other gawd damn NFL market that has a baseball team actually supporting both. Only in Cleveland (also the worst NFL team in the league) do you have this support one sport while shitting on the other stupidity.

Would you continue to go to a restaurant that year after year charges you the same as fancy restaurants, but serves you microwaved Chicken McNuggets and 10 year old Beef-n-Cheddars?

If the Browns put Thurman Thomas and Sterling Sharp on the field in 2012, they would probably have 10,000 at their games too. Although Sharpe might have been an improvement over half of these receivers at 47.

All of Pup's post could have been written word for word by me. The difference for me, as a fan of the Indians and Browns, is that the Browns by sheer trial and error will eventually get it right. They throw money at new regimes, coaches, etc. They consistently fail, but damn, they at least aren't happy with it.

The Indians are telling you that they love things (1 post season since 2001) just as they are! Give me another organization that has kept its heirarchy in place for going on 12 years after below average results? You can't. Even if in your twisted brain, you think Shapiro and Antonetti have done so-so, it is still time for a change in this business. You simply do not get that longevity for subpar performance for 12 years.

The years/dollars thing is a fraud. Pup is correct- FA's want both. This year was an anomoly. Tons of players signing for 1,2, and 3 years! They couldn't get one of the guys they "wanted"? Pay Beltran $3 million more for each of the two years if money isn't an issue. If so, he is here. Same with Pena on the one year. Or the steal of the offseason, Willignham. And then to have your team President insult everyone by saying they had questions on his defense? No...they won't pay.

The worst part is that this is the "window." They won't commit even now?

e0y2e3 wrote:And most other markets behave in a manner that doesn't reflect publicly choosing one sport over another.

The fans in Cleveland don't, thus making the argument valid.

What would make it a "valid argument" is if you actually had a split (A/B) test when the games went head to head enough to draw a meaningful conclusion. The rest is trolling at worst (since this is from you, this is likely ;-) ), opinion at best.

With the possible exception of premium (corporate) seating, the Indians don't draw for reasons completely separate from the Browns, and for reasons unqiue to the market's economic and non-economic attraction or aversion to major league baseball and the franchise in particular.

e0y2e3 wrote:There is no point in discussing anything with people that believe Hafner and Westbrook were chosen over CC and Lee.

Really, no point at all.

.

I dont believe that they were chosen over CC and Lee but I do believe they chose Westbrook and Hafner over CC. They took easier signs and quantity over allocating all of that resource money to 1 player and taking a risk.

Again they could have signed him for longer than the original 2 yr extension. They didnt.

One thing to take into consideration here, and once again pointing out how short-sighted this dunderheaded FO is, is that by trading Cliff Lee, they told the fan base "We are NOT going to put the money into this franchise it needs to compete, but we'll bullshit you until we're blue in the face."

By trading Lee, the second Cy Young Award Winner in as many years, this team lost more in potential revenue than they would have just by paying Cliff Lee's contract. I wish there was a way to quantify that statement, but there's no way you can prove to me I'm wrong.

The lack of interest in a team that has been in first place or flirting with first place lately is all the proof I need.

Randy Lerner wants to win, he's just too 'effin stupid to figure out how to win. The Dolans would like to win (because that increases revenue), but they don't have the will to make the investment. That would be too risky. To them, the safest bet is to dump salary and keep your fingers crossed.

e0y2e3 wrote:If you are going to make comments about the NFL not being apples to apples (even though FANS CHOOSING IT AND SHITTING ON THE INDIANS MAKES IT AN APT COMPARISON) you have to also accept that the # of people attending the Cavs games (for the vastly more popular sports league) is pretty damn close to the # of people attending Indians games.

Both fan bases are shit.

Maybe both are but there's still a difference. The Cavs are drawing functional crowds with triple the ticket prices (at least) while the Indians are dead last with a better team. The NBA's popularity compared to baseball can't make that big of a difference, at least in this market.

It is the perception of ownership by the market I believe. Nothing to do with franchise vs franchise binary economic decisions.